Amanda Knox Is Innocent

[Orang Utan]

Whoa. That's the worlds laziest answer. Even "I dunno" could trump that.
Why no sign of anyone trampling foliage outside where the 'break in' took place. Nothing.
Attempts to reenact the break in were impossible.
A massive clean up before the break in that left only one of knoxes fingerprints, despite the fact that she lived in the house.
flat roughed up, and then the glass was broken?
Only Meredith's clothes in the warm washing machine after she was dead.
Knox came back for a shower and to collect a mop to take back to a house with a shower and a mop.
DNA evidence on the knife or not, Sollecito comes up with an impossible reason Meredith's DNA is on the knife.
Lies about phone calls to the police and Merediths phone.

Feh, I suppose all murders have some loose ends right? Even thought there are people who have to be lying at least about some details and still have not come clean.

ms kercher to you

 

[dylans]

Whoa. That's the worlds laziest answer. Even "I dunno" could trump that.
Why no sign of anyone trampling foliage outside where the 'break in' took place. Nothing.
Attempts to reenact the break in were impossible.
A massive clean up before the break in that left only one of knoxes fingerprints, despite the fact that she lived in the house.
flat roughed up, and then the glass was broken?
Only Meredith's clothes in the warm washing machine after she was dead.
Knox came back for a shower and to collect a mop to take back to a house with a shower and a mop.
DNA evidence on the knife or not, Sollecito comes up with an impossible reason Meredith's DNA is on the knife.
Lies about phone calls to the police and Merediths phone.

Feh, I suppose all murders have some loose ends right? Even thought there are people who have to be lying at least about some details and still have not come clean.

Woah. You are starting to sound like the 9/11 conspiracy theorists who list their so called "evidence and cite lack of explanations as proof that George Bush and Mossad must have done it. The questions you ask are not the only ones to ask. A crime scene not only tells a story of what is there but also of what is missing. So here are a few for you.

If other people (lets assume they are persons unknown) participated in the brutal rape and murder of this woman, where is the physical evidence of their participation? Not, bleached knives and clothes in washing machines, not "the roses weren't trampled. I mean where is the bloodstained hand prints smeared on the wall of the bedroom. I mean the dna of the perpetrators mingled with the blood of the victim. Evidence of Guedes participation is everywhere in that room. Everywhere. Bloody footprints. DNA. Fingerprints. Palm prints. Body fluids but nothing of others participants. Not a scrap. So we are to believe that persons unknown, participated in the brutal rape and stabbing murder of Kercher. Held her down while she was raped and butchered and yet somehow managed to avoid all evidence of contamination. Not a drop of blood, not a finger print. Not a scrap of DNA. Not a single stain on their clothes. Not a scrap of evidence that they came into contact with any blood. This is impossible. Stabbings are messy, very messy and Kercher was stabbed 47 times!

Or perhaps they cleaned up after themselves? So they managed to clean up every scrap of evidence of their participation, every scrap of contamination, every bloody hand print and finger print and every scrap of dna whilst miraculously leaving evidence of Guide for the cops to find?

Don't be so bloody stupid. Guedes dna, fingerprints, palm prints, bloody foot prints, body fluids etc were there because......

Every other participants dna, fingerprints, bloody palm prints, bloody foot prints, body fluids were entirely absent from that room because.....

But hey, the roses outside the window weren't trampled

 

[twentythreedom]

Yeah so like someone cleaned up, then they 'broke in', then they forgot that they hadn't actually broken in so they broke in. Only they 'broke in' in a way that was proven impossible.

Doesn't prove it was knox of course but it also doesn't make a lot of sense.

None of it does! My point is that we don't know if it was a 'fake' break in or not. And probably never will.

The Italians really fucked this one up...

 

[Fedayn]

Woah. You are starting to sound like the 9/11 conspiracy theorists who list their so called "evidence and cite lack of explanations as proof that George Bush and Mossad must have done it. The questions you ask are not the only ones to ask. .

But funnily they are questions you have avoided answering.

 

[ymu]

Does anyone know when the media first reported that the break-in was staged (as it undoubtedly was - check the evidence presented in court, ffs!)?

Guede has always maintained that the doorbell rang when he was on the toilet, and that there had been no break-in when he left the house - it's in the Skype conversation that he had in Germany (not knowing that his mate was with the police at the time), which was around 2 weeks after the murder. If he knew that it was staged by that time, then maybe he fitted it into his story - if he didn't know, then why in hell would he maintain that there had been no break-in when it would have fitted his story perfectly?

I do not know what to think of Guede, but his story seems an awful lot more plausible than this orgy gone wrong stuff. Everything in that Skype conversation fits the physical evidence - including the fact that they found his DNA inside her, but not his sperm. There's no real evidence that she'd been sexually assaulted - see the pathology section in the trial report (translated here: http://www.perugiamurderfile.org/viewtopic.php?p=53735), or this Telegraph report if you can't be arsed to download it.

Defend Knox and Sollecito, by all means - I hope they are innocent - but there are some real problems with Guede's conviction too. It's fucking hypocritical to dismiss all evidence against them and then ignore all the evidence that backs him up. Same shitty fantasising prosecutor for all three of them, and masses of unanswered questions.

 

[danny la rouge]

Yeah he did.

Well, the Court of Cassation said that Rudy Guede was not alone in killing Kercher. So, either it was wrong, and this will now have to be reviewed, or it was right, and the accomplice(s) have yet to be identified. These are the unanswered questions the Kercher family want answered. Whether they can now be answered is a different matter.

 

[twentythreedom]

Yeah so like someone cleaned up, then they 'broke in', then they forgot that they hadn't actually broken in so they broke in. Only they 'broke in' in a way that was proven impossible.

Doesn't prove it was knox of course but it also doesn't make a lot of sense.

There's also no certainty that these things were part of a linear sequence of conneceted events, performed by the same people. No-one knows what the break-in thing was about exactly. Fake or not.

 

[Orang Utan]

bloody amateur detectives

 

[twentythreedom]

bloody amateur detectives

Yeah innit. Bottom line is this - we don't know what happened and never will. End of.

 

[dylans]

But funnily they are questions you have avoided answering.

They are irrelevent. You want us to believe that Meredith Kercher was held down, raped and stabbed 47 times with the loss of 2 litres of blood and the perps managed to do all that without leaving a single scrap of evidence of their presence? Bollocks

 

[Fedayn]

bloody amateur detectives

People disagreeing, arguing and questioning one of the biggest new stories in the world today... I mean it's just so unusual.......

 

[Fedayn]

They are irrelevent. You want us to believe that Meredith Kercher was held down, raped and stabbed 47 times with the loss of 2 litres of blood and the perps managed to do all that without leaving a single scrap of evidence of their presence? Bollocks

Bollocks if you believe the burglar flew through the window and left no footprints or marks outside where he allegedly broke in. Poor old rudy, if only he'd stuck to marketing his ability to fly instead of murder.....

 

[dylans]

Bollocks if you believe the burglar flew through the window and left no footprints or marks outside where he allegedly broke in. Poor old rudy, if only he'd stuck to marketing his ability to fly instead of murder.....

Evidence of his presence is all over that room. Just his. Strange that

 

[Fedayn]

Evidence of his presence is all over that room. Just his. Strange that

Given I haven't doubted he was there I am left wondering what you're drooling on about? We all agree Guede was there. Now, care to answer the questions Atomic Suplex asked or will you evade it yet again.... Just a thought like oh munificent one....

 

[dylans]

Given I haven't doubted he was there I am left wondering what you're drooling on about? We all agree Guede was there. Now, care to answer the questions Atomic Suplex asked or will you evade it yet again.... Just a thought like oh munificent one....

You answer the question I posed. Why is there not a single scrap of evidence of the presence of anyone but Guede in the room where she was killed. How is it possible for a group of attackers to hold down a woman who is fighting for her life, rape her and butcher her without leaving a single scrap of contamination at the scene? Not a finger print, not a footprint, not a hair, not a scrap of skin, not a palm print, nothing. All except Guede who did it.alone. You can't answer it. It's impossible.

 

[Fedayn]

You answer the question I posed. Why is there not a single scrap of evidence of the presence of anyone but Guede in the room. How is it possible for a group of attackers to hold down a woman who is fighting for her life, rape her and butcher her without leaving a single scrap of contamination at the scene? All except Guede who did it.alone

Well given we know there was a massive clean up with virtually NO fingerprints of Knox's in her own house then one might wonder why it's so clean? Or would you not see anything wrong with that scenario? One might wonder why a house she lived in had all but one of her fingerprints removed. I mean, that's just so completely normal isn't it. You reckon me or you might have more than just one fingerprint of ours in a house we live in?

 

[Orang Utan]

People disagreeing, arguing and questioning one of the biggest new stories in the world today... I mean it's just so unusual.......

It's a big story but people seem to have very definite ideas about what happened or whether Knox did it or not. It's a bit ridiculous

 

[dylans]

Well given we know there was a massive clean up with virtually NO fingerprints of Knox's in her own house then one might wonder why it's so clean? Or would you not see anything wrong with that scenario? One might wonder why a house she lived in had all but one of her fingerprints removed. I mean, that's just so completely normal isn't it. You reckon me or you might have more than just one fingerprint of ours in a house we live in?

No. sorry, Kercher's room wasn't clean at all. Evidence of Guedes presence was everywhere. So you have to argue that the perps cleaned her room but somehow managed to clean everything, except evidence of Guedes presence? Forget the kitchen, or the shower or outside the window. All this is secondary to the one crucial location. The crime scene. The place where we are meant to believe a violent gang rape and murder took place. You expect us to believe that a gang of people held her down stabbed her 47 times and didnt leave any evidence of anyones presence except Guede? Not so much as a finger print or a solitary hair or fibre? Impossible.

 

[phildwyer]

Bollocks. I have argued that they were innocent from the beginning. Remember my Occams razor analogy. The one you dismissed with such vehement contempt. You are the one with egg on his face matey. You were the one baying for the blood of an innocent couple a few days ago. Its you who should take a long hard look at yourself and your vicious authoritarian instincts. You have been proved totally wrong on this.You accepted the bullshit story of sex orgies gone wrong and even tried to argue that pot can turn people into killers. How you can have the nerve to even show your face on here after your shameful performance is beyond me.

Yep. I have to say I'm surprised that Belboid didn't squirm away quietly from this thread, or even from the boards. No-one with any pride or self-respect could still hang around here, but then I suppose it is clear that Belboid long ago abandoned any scruples or morality he once have had.

In 10 years time, or even 5, the "guilters" will be profoundly ashamed of their behavior over the last few days. To have been a "guilter" will be to carry a heavy burden of shame throughout the rest of life. The Knox case will be the Fatty Arbuckle of the 21st century. I look forward to reminding Belboid of his blood-thirsty, authoritarian diatribes.

 

[Fedayn]

It's a big story but people seem to have very definite ideas about what happened whether Knox did it or not. It's a bit ridiculous

I don't, I am not convinced she is so innocent, I also don't know she is guilty. I'm simply not convinced of her innocene. However, I also agree that with view of the utter incompetence of the investigation the jury was almost bound to acquit. I also think given the whole mess that it should end now. Not because I think it is all boxed off but because nothing will come of it save more heartache for all. However, unlike our resident psychics phil and dylans-definitely not mysogynists like phil claims the majority of those who disagree with him are-I don't have a set view. I just don't see it all boxed off and perfectly ended.....

 

[ymu]

A break-in needn't have to be a trash-the-gaff burglary - there's plenty reasons to break in somewhere and not empty stuff all over the floor in the process. I'm not saying I'm convinced either way, but the faked break-in thing is built on lazy preconceptions and stereotypes. It may be true, fuck knows, but I don't think anyone can be certain either way.

Stuff from the wardrobe had been pulled over the floor - a laptop and camera were still there unstolen. Romanelli testified in court about finding glass on top of her stuff that had been strewn across the floor, as did the first policeman on the scene. The shutters had been left closed by Romanelli when she went away, and there was glass up to the outside edge of the windowsill but none on the ground below. No foliage disturbed or signs of activity below the window, despite the soil being damp.

The evidence is discussed over about four pages in the Massei report. No need to guess.

 

[Fedayn]

No. sorry, Kercher's room wasn't clean at all. Evidence of Guedes presence was everywhere. So you have to argue that the perps cleaned her room but somehow managed to clean everything, except evidence of Guedes presence? Forget the kitchen, or the shower or outside the window. All this is secondary to the one crucial location. The crime scene. The place where we are meant to believe a violent gang rape and murder took place. You expect us to believe that a gang of people held her down stabbed her 47 times and didnt leave any evidence of anyones presence except Guede? Not so much as a finger print or a solitary hair or fibre? Impossible.

That doesn't refute that lack of her fingerprints elsewhere in her own house.... Unless they disappered magically. Bit like Guede flying into the house only touching the floor once in the house.
She wasn't stabbed 47 times there were 47 wounds/marks, notable and important difference.
You see this is the point, you are so convinced, that even the glaring discrepencies don't bother you, fine carry on. I'm not convinced, and you still haven't answered Atomic Suplex points, because you....

 

[ATOMIC SUPLEX]

bloody amateur detectives

I'm not being a detective, I was just asking for answers to a couple of questions. A simple "I can't explain that bit" might be better than just saying "doesn't matter, all cases have loose ends" *Shrugs*

Woah. You are starting to sound like the 9/11 conspiracy theorists

What? The unexplained evidence and the impossible stories. How is something that can be explained by living people but isn't somehow like something that has been explained?

If other people (lets assume they are persons unknown) participated in the brutal rape and murder of this woman, where is the physical evidence of their participation?

Er, the forensic evidence?
The coroners report.
Are you even taking your side of the argument seriously?

But hey, the roses outside the window weren't trampled

There were no signs of anyone climbing in or out of the suspected break in area. It was impossible. Don't play it down by trying to make it just a couple of comedy roses. Nobody approached the house to break in. They tried to reconstruct the break in and it was impossible, the court was shown this. It's not contested. It's an oddity, but that does not necessarily mean knox committed a murder.

 

[ymu]

Woah. You are starting to sound like the 9/11 conspiracy theorists who list their so called "evidence and cite lack of explanations as proof that George Bush and Mossad must have done it. The questions you ask are not the only ones to ask. A crime scene not only tells a story of what is there but also of what is missing. So here are a few for you.

If other people (lets assume they are persons unknown) participated in the brutal rape and murder of this woman, where is the physical evidence of their participation? Not, bleached knives and clothes in washing machines, not "the roses weren't trampled. I mean where is the bloodstained hand prints smeared on the wall of the bedroom. I mean the dna of the perpetrators mingled with the blood of the victim. Evidence of Guedes participation is everywhere in that room. Everywhere. Bloody footprints. DNA. Fingerprints. Palm prints. Body fluids but nothing of others participants. Not a scrap. So we are to believe that persons unknown, participated in the brutal rape and stabbing murder of Kercher. Held her down while she was raped and butchered and yet somehow managed to avoid all evidence of contamination. Not a drop of blood, not a finger print. Not a scrap of DNA. Not a single stain on their clothes. Not a scrap of evidence that they came into contact with any blood. This is impossible. Stabbings are messy, very messy and Kercher was stabbed 47 times!

Or perhaps they cleaned up after themselves? So they managed to clean up every scrap of evidence of their participation, every scrap of contamination, every bloody hand print and finger print and every scrap of dna whilst miraculously leaving evidence of Guide for the cops to find?

Don't be so bloody stupid. Guedes dna, fingerprints, palm prints, bloody foot prints, body fluids etc were there because......

Every other participants dna, fingerprints, bloody palm prints, bloody foot prints, body fluids were entirely absent from that room because.....

But hey, the roses outside the window weren't trampled

Can you point to the evidence in the pathology report that a brutal rape took place.

Ta.

 

[ymu]

They are irrelevent. You want us to believe that Meredith Kercher was held down, raped and stabbed 47 times with the loss of 2 litres of blood and the perps managed to do all that without leaving a single scrap of evidence of their presence? Bollocks

And the bit where she was stabbed 47 times.

Ta.

 

[savoloysam]

They are irrelevent. You want us to believe that Meredith Kercher was held down, raped and stabbed 47 times with the loss of 2 litres of blood and the perps managed to do all that without leaving a single scrap of evidence of their presence? Bollocks

You had better ask the Italian polce that one.

 

[danny la rouge]

It's a big story but people seem to have very definite ideas about what happened or whether Knox did it or not. It's a bit ridiculous

Some people do seem to know beyond doubt (and not necessarily the ones who said "not me!").

Dylans, for example, I'm sure won't mind me saying that he thinks Guede definitely acted alone. Maybe he did. But the Court of Cassation said he did not. http://truejustice.org/ee//documents/perugia/guedesupremecourtsentencingreport.pdf

(I should say that I haven't read all of that report.)

 

[twentythreedom]

Stuff from the wardrobe had been pulled over the floor - a laptop and camera were still there unstolen. Romanelli testified in court about finding glass on top of her stuff that had been strewn across the floor, as did the first policeman on the scene. The shutters had been left closed by Romanelli when she went away, and there was glass up to the outside edge of the windowsill but none on the ground below. No foliage disturbed or signs of activity below the window, despite the soil being damp.

The evidence is discussed over about four pages in the Massei report. No need to guess.

Unstolen stuff - so what? Stuff strewn on floor - so what? There's stuff strewn all over my room... Shutters closed - maybe someone opened them. No glass outside - well, if you broke a window from outside... etc etc etc

"No need to guess"? I just don't think the evidence is that conclusive tbh. We'll never know.

 

[dylans]

Can you point to the evidence in the pathology report that a brutal rape took place.

Ta.

The prosecutions case was that Kercher was killed resisting a violent sexual assault. This is not disputed by those who believe there were more perpetrators than Guede. Indeed it is at the heart of their argument. That Kercher was held down and killed by more than one perpetrator while resisting rape. Guede himself was convicted of murder and sexual assault. Now you tell me how is it possible for a gang of rapist murderers to hold down and butcher a woman who was no doubt fighting for her life without leaving a single scrap of evidence of their presence. In fact, I will widen my question. Can you show me a case of sexual assault and murder by stabbing anywhere in the world ever where the perpetrator managed to commit such a crime without leaving any evidence of their presence?

 

[ymu]

Unstolen stuff - so what? Stuff strewn on floor - so what? There's stuff strewn all over my room... Shutters closed - maybe someone opened them. No glass outside - well, if you broke a window from outside... etc etc etc

"No need to guess"? I just don't think the evidence is that conclusive tbh. We'll never know.

The wardrobe had been emptied. Glass was on top of the stuff thrown out of the wardrobe.

There's been a court case with witnesses and testimonies and everything. Why are you making shit up when you can read what the people there, and the woman who lived in the room, said about it?